The
Christmas season—the most
wonderful time of the year— elevates the modern standoff between
traditional faith and rising skepticism. For religious conservatives, winning the “War on Christmas” may
require a form of Christianity that is neither captivating nor consistent with
the celebration of Christ’s birth. In fact, threats to a commercialized and
culturally-defined holiday may strengthen Christmas by drawing attention to a
more compelling faith.

Christmas
errands recently sent me in search of wrapping paper, decorations, and holiday
cheer to wonder as I wandered
through the halls of the local hobby and craft mega store. And suddenly, what
to my wondering eyes should appear, but a statueofSanta, kneeling before
the baby Jesus in a manger (there are many Santa
& Jesusproductsavailable
for your gift-giving needs). This combination of cultural and religious
Christmas symbols is an example of why December is a unique time in the
American calendar each year. Many American evangelicals view the world through
a sacred versus secular dichotomy for much of the year. This requires a strict
filtering of all non-Christian influences. But during Christmas time, candycanes
are a witnessing
tool, Neil Diamond proclaims
of the joy of the newborn savior,
and we hear the stories of annual battles over courthouse
lawns. Some retailers choose to greet consumers with “Happy Holidays” instead
of “Merry Christmas” because they view it as a smart business decision.

Perceived threats to Christmas have
generated an active War
on Christmas map to document the mounting opposition to the holiday. Last
summer, Texas Governor
Rick Perry signed into law
a bill to grant public schools
the right to display religious symbols and for students and teachers to say
religious greetings such as “Happy Hanukkah” and “Merry Christmas.” While the
law has generated attention for Texas as the frontline of the “war” on
Christmas, the bill itself restricts any display that “encourages adherence to
a particular religious belief.” The law has led to rumors of schools banning
religious language and even the wearing of red and green clothing. This brings
new meaning to “blue laws” designed to protect public space in favor of
religious traditions. In addition to legislation, religious conservatives are
fighting hard in defense of Christmas. Sarah Palin has published
a book in her efforts to “protect the heart” of Christmas. She cites
numerous incidents where municipal officials or business owners have backed
away from using the word “Christmas” in favor of a more generic winter holiday.
The American Family Association has encouraged boycotting retailers if
they refrain from using the word Christmas to describe the holiday season.

Religious campaigns like the Texas
law, Palin’s book, and the AFA boycott typically bring to mind Richard
Hofstadter’s “The
Paranoid Style in American Politics,” first delivered November 21, 1963, as
an address at Oxford University. Hofstadter saw conservatives reacting to the
rise of the New Deal and communism with fear that capitalism and democracy
would crumble. To Hofstadter, right wingers of the early 60s were anxious about
the erosion of their rights, but these fears were unfounded—and also in keeping
with a long tradition of paranoia. Hofstadter is cited far
too often
to castigate any
(mostly conservative)
group who appears to be opposed to
change.

In the modern debate over
Christmas, however, the shift in the dominance of Christianity over the culture
is real, but the reaction to it is misguided. In defending Christmas and associating
the holiday with warfare, these religious leaders may win a cultural battle,
but damage the nature of Christianity in the process. A recent study
suggested that many young atheists followed a similar journey to unbelief. They spoke of an initial exposure to Christianity,
but they grew disillusioned when the church focused more on social issues and
less on the power of the gospel message. As one of the students commented, “The connection between Jesus and a
person's life was not clear.” In the “war on Christmas,” winning the battle for
cultural dominance takes away the power of the message of the incarnation.

What kind of Christianity would
draw people to the manger? Fifty years ago, the violence of church bombings in
Birmingham led to a very different boycott of Christmas. James
Baldwin joined with Ossie Davis, Ruby Dee and others calling for families to refrain
from shopping and send their gift money to Civil Rights organizations. “…Santa
will not come this year because he is in mourning for the children of
Birmingham, who will get no gifts this year or the next year or the next.” Civil
Rights leader James Farmer called for a separate Christmas shopping boycott
of stores which had practiced discriminatory practices. While these boycotts
were eventually called
off, these efforts were steeped in biblical language and a called for action to
protect the rights—and lives—of Americans. They rooted their movement in a
faith that called them to activism and sacrifice. Their Christianity called them to share the anguish of loss with those who suffered around them.

If you are looking for war this holiday season, students of history could focus on the events of actual wars, fought during Christmas.
World War II provided the fantastic story of General Tony McAuliffe and the
101st Airborne in Bastogne
during Christmas 1944. Or go back further, to the Christmas Truce
of 1914, when British and German soldiers were lured over the top of their
trenches by the sound of the enemy singing familiar Christmas hymns. What
resulted was a short-lived and unofficial cessation that included an exchange
of gifts, sweets, and goodwill. Some soldiers even gave free haircuts to their
enemies. If the nationalistic passions of the Great War could be interrupted by
the familiar refrains of Silent Night, perhaps there is hope that the No-Man’s
Land of the War on Christmas might be a place for peace. Merry Christmas— war is
over, if you want it.

I pointed to Hofstadter because his paranoia thesis (or status anxiety) is often used to attack conservative efforts like those of Palin and the AFA. Many times this is a lazy appeal to authority. In the "war on Christmas" these changes in the culture are real, and measurable. So I think that it is a mistake to accuse Palin and others of paranoia. On that we seem to agree.

As I wrote: "In the modern debate over Christmas, however, the shift in the dominance of Christianity over the culture is real, but the reaction to it is misguided. In defending Christmas and associating the holiday with warfare, these religious leaders may win a cultural battle, but damage the nature of Christianity in the process."

My point was to examine the effects of this cultural war, and consider other strategies in response to these very real cultural changes--strategies that may not embrace warfare under the banner of holding up the Christian message of the incarnation.